My view on it is this: it's happening. I'm not thrilled about it, but there it is. I don't have the money or influence to change it unfortunately. :) That said, hopefully future projects in the area will be better on all accounts. Density is good, but lack of character isn't, in my opinion. However, I can't demand that every building has the same standards for character (as if we can even get everyone to agree as to what "character" is...). Even the best cities in the world have some really boring buildings that don't seem to fit the area or the hope for the area. It happens, but hopefully some really cool stuff will be built nearby to make up for it. :)

The only thing that pisses me off more than this suburban design we got downtown is thinking about what could have been. This was the original proposal for this site.

http://i.imgur.com/iIQiJrW.jpg

http://www.austintowers.net/Austin_D...s_proposed.php

I think we gotten spoiled at seeing alot of these flashy high-rises going up. This project will still add density, I mean it's not like another row of townhomes going in or even worse a gas station. I think at one point before all this transition began on Rainey St. that was there was a proposed gas station on one of the land parcels.

Sutton actually planned a third tower (not pictured of course) for the site. Then Sutton pulled a bait and switch and planned three towers at a different site...a pattern is developing.

OMG. Don't even hint at the nightmare of having a Millennium II going up over there! That would ruin Waller Creek forever. However, I am sure the City and the people of Austin would never allow something like that to not only ruin Waller Creek but to rival the Tours Aillaud of the Paris suburbs as one of the biggest architectural faux pas in history. I am glad to see that Millennium Rainey is beginning to elicit the amount of rage on this forum that I was hoping it would, because, to me, this is one of those Never Again(!!!) moments! This place is butt ugly, totally out of place, never, never should have been built there and has absolutely no redeeming feature that adds to the character or the vitality of the neighborhood. It's like offering a taste of Fresno to downtown Austin. Who really wants it?

Clapping and applauding!! Thank you for taking the time to say all that.
Agreed!
:cheers:

All great points about why this ugly monstrosity should have never seen the light of day.

There's two points I'd like to add and I've said this more than once in the past. GRANTED, Rainey street was zoned for CBD density and everyone knew that the street would inevitably go through a transitional period, but there is something to be said for the organic formation of a vibrant entertainment district. To say "oh it was going to be temporary so we shouldn't be upset" is short sighted. These popular establishments bring character to the neighborhood that wasn't there before and that is something that should be saved whether it's been around for 50+ years or only 10. It's not just about the new development itself, it's about how that development will enhance and area's charm and culture. Developments that don't do that should be scrutinized so developers will put more thought in what they propose to build in the area.

The second point is more of an "I wish they had done it this way instead" rant but it's something that I hope is considered for future developments.

Had they stacked the development making it 16 floors instead of 8 they would not have needed to take up such a large foot print. That is a HUGE footprint and it's not the kind of density that helps the environment such as water runoff. The building is just plain massive and frankly it looks out of place. If they had made the footprint smaller they could have actually helped solve an issue that the neighborhood faces and that's vehicle congestion coupled with lack of sidewalks.

There used to be an alley between Rainey and whatever street that is to the east (what's left of it). What they could have done is create a pedestrian corridor with groundfloor retail along the alley. It could have been lit up nicely at night plus it would have been a second access point to the bars and restaurants like Lustre Pearl. That in turn would have helped relive some of the issue of people having to walk on Rainey at least for those going to the businesses on the east side of the street and it would have created a new area of the neighborhood centered around pedestrians with large trees shading the corridor.

That right there could have been a perfect opportunity and would have enhanced the character of the neighborhood instead of diminishing it. It's something that maybe developers will (and should) consider for future development. Let's keep the natural organic element of Rainey street and leave these bars and restaurants that have taken over turn of the century homes or lots and develop smaller footprint and taller developments which takes full advantage and utilization of the alleyways for pedestrian oriented corridors.

OMG all of y'all are spoiled brats. This is a fine project.

Click "laredo texas photos" in your search engine.
Click on "Images of laredo texas"
Open up another window and go to Millennium Rainey on the Austin Skyscraper Forum
Click on your favorite photo of that wonderful building and drag building image into photo #5 of Images of laredo texas onto the open space along the banks of the Rio Grande, in front of the lovely skyline of downtown laredo
Drop that thing into that open space
Pray really hard that it really works!
(I assume you were kidding, weren't you)

I actually am totally fine with this project. Five years ago we would be SOOO happy with this.

The lack of ground floor retail is the main thing that bothers me. It's only faux-urban if it lacks ground floor retail, IMO.

And, of course, the fact that it unnecessarily takes up a huge floor area. That bothers me, too. They could have easily built a tall building and gotten the same level of occupancy.

That said, for once, wwmiv and I agree on something. This project is fine and y'all are a bunch of spoiled brats who are always looking for things to complain about. (I'm the same way, much of the time.) Maybe I'm overly eager to see Austin become urbanized quickly, but I like seeing this building when I ride by it. It adds something to the fabric of the city, even if it's not true urbanism. Most people can't tell the difference anyway and sometimes the distinction is easy for even me to ignore. And, hell, it's nowhere near as bad as the Railyard Condominiums (a gated, retail-less community in the heart of downtown which people inexplicably like defending).

I'm not even sure that ground retail is a defining feature of urbanism. There are plenty of urban designs that lack ground retail. Yes, I'd ideally like a few more retail spaces, but not every lot everywhere can support a panoply of retail.

Ground retail definitely isn't necessary for urbanism. Yes, for the busy streets in urban designs, but Rainy is a small street off of another small street.

Look at Manhattan, for example, the best place in the US, perhaps world, for walkability. The long, busy avenue blocks have retail while the short street blocks have nondescript residential facades. And it works. Obviously this isn't a perfect comparison, but it demonstrates street retail everywhere isn't critical for neighborhood success.

I completely agree that all streets don't need retail. I even argued that in a post on another page. Your point is valid...for a block that had nothing on it. But this project took a block of downtown that had plenty of activity and inactivated it. There was so much activity on this parcel, at least fronting Rainey. Now, there is nothing except the parking garage exit. Rainey is a small street only in the scheme of Texas streets. You mention Manhattan...there are plenty of streets that are narrower that have more activity that Rainey. In Boston, we certainly have even more evidence of that. Long-term, depending on what the city does, Rainey doesn't have to remain a disconnected part of downtown off a "small" street.

What exactly is there to be "happy" about? It's a project that is getting built...that's about it. It's adding density, but in the grand scheme of density, it's medium at best. Large units, huge footprint, massive parking structure. And in case anyone else wants to argue about density, I think somewhere in the forum it was stated that the total structure is around 250,000 sq. ft. of development (of course not counting the parking) on 2.2 acres (around 96,000 square feet). That is a Floor-to-Area ratio of 2.6 on downtown, zoned central business district, land. On land that has no height restrictions, no Capital View Corridors, and has a base FAR of 8:1 (which always gets increased for good projects). Medium density at absolute best. It has no redeeming architectural features, and on a page the started to discuss skyscrapers, its certainly not that tall. The only thing to be "happy" about is that there was a crane building something.

Man...the more I look back into this project, the more upset I get. I totally forgot about the alley issue, which beyond what could of been, impacts the prospects of other parcels on Rainey and East. And I supposed there may be a contingent on this forum that are just looking for a high number of cranes on the horizon. But for me at least, I wasn't happy three years ago with this project when it was announced...and I am sure that would of been the same five years ago too.

You can't compare Austin to Manhattan. Manhattan also has very long dark alley blocks that you don't walk down at 3 in the morning with no retail along them. Do you want to compare Austin to Boston? How about Miami? Minneapolis? Los Angeles? San Francisco? Why? Some people might be a little more successful in comparing Austin to Portland, but we have very little in common with those other cities. But you put this project in any one of the cities I mentioned, and it would still be ugly. And, like a lot of other people have said, this huge project uses up way too much land in exchange for its right to be really ugly! If we had eight or nine of these things in our downtown, the quality of life in downtown Austin would go way down! And you know as well as I do, that they would all be future slums! They have public housing developments in other cities that are far more attractive than this development is, some even with parks and open spaces which this place totally ignores! This is just a huge ugly hunk of concrete! Just thinking about having to live there depresses me. In the middle of the complex on the 6th floor would be intolerably depressing. There is a huge complex in the far southwestern side of San Francisco that this place reminds me of, and I used to visit a friend who lived there. You walked way down the hall to find an elevator, and by the time you finally found and got to his apartment, you were almost suicidal! It was VERY depressing!

You guys are being totally absurd about this. If there was value to be extracted for a taller tower, it would have been. This is a free market and people want to make money, they built what could have been built.

And an active block, Myomi? What are you smoking? This was in no way an active block. There was Lustre Pearl on the corner and White House that was there for about 18 months before they cleared the lot. So it was that and a bunch of houses and dilapidated sidewalks with a corner bar that's being replaced by first floor retail and an active residential entrance. The driveway isn't great, but that comes down to cost.

Fruitvale Transit Center in Oakland, CA is a very nice attractive project with ONE FOURTH of the apartments that this ugly prison/fortress-like ugly hunk of concrete has. Fruitvale Transit Center has entertainment, retail, restaurants. plazas and open areas. Millennium Rainey is going to have ONE tiny retail spot? I would rather have the BAR than that! This prison/fortress-looking place will attract undesirable people from outside the neighborhood. Watch them come! Of course the object of a free market is to make money. But if you want to allow them to build crap and trash property values, then don't cry out when they take YOUR money and run away with it, because you will have deserved it! And don't complain when you get mugged in the neighborhood YOU let them build!

Bunch of spoiled brats??? If you refer to those of us who actually want to keep the character of what Rainey street has become then by all means we are spoiled brats.

Have you even been to Rainey street at all? Because it seems to me you haven't. It's been an active and busy block for a few years now not just 18 months as you so put it. There are times when cars can barely get through due to the amount of people in the street. If you don't consider that active please enlighten me.

And where is this retail going to be located? Facing Rainey street?? Someone earlier mentioned it was only one retail unit. The rest will be ground floor residential. So how do you think having a row of residences facing a row of bars across a small neighborhood size street is going to be for the future of those businesses? So I take it you don't care if they ultimately close and Rainey ends up being just another dull and sterile street? Do you not think that it should he saved at all?

I have looked at Millennium Rainey's developer's other projects, and Bingo! They have many, many, many many other developments that are just as crappy as this one, all over the country. I know I was joking about how this development would fit right in place in Lubbock, but they actually DO have a development in Lubbock, Overton Park, which is MUCH more attractive that this one is. But there is one thing that seems to be in common with ALL of their developments: They DON'T like trees, they DON'T like open spaces, and they DON'T like good retail spots. And they ALL look like potential future slums which will bring the property values down in all the areas they are built! VIVA LE FREE MARKET!

The retail is supposed to be a restaurant on the northwest corner of the ground floor. It will be facing Rainey St. (Unless something has changed in their plans of course.)